↓ Skip to main content

Pirating conserved phage mechanisms promotes promiscuous staphylococcal pathogenicity island transfer

Overview of attention for article published in eLife, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
25 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pirating conserved phage mechanisms promotes promiscuous staphylococcal pathogenicity island transfer
Published in
eLife, August 2017
DOI 10.7554/elife.26487
Pubmed ID
Authors

Janine Bowring, Maan M Neamah, Jorge Donderis, Ignacio Mir-Sanchis, Christian Alite, J Rafael Ciges-Tomas, Elisa Maiques, Iltyar Medmedov, Alberto Marina, José R Penadés

Abstract

Targeting conserved and essential processes is a successful strategy to combat enemies. Remarkably, the clinically important Staphylococcus aureus pathogenicity islands (SaPIs) use this tactic to spread in nature. SaPIs reside passively in the host chromosome, under the control of the SaPI-encoded master repressor, Stl. It has been assumed that SaPI de-repression is effected by specific phage proteins that bind to Stl, initiating the SaPI cycle. Different SaPIs encode different Stl repressors, so each targets a specific phage protein for its de-repression. Broadening this narrow vision, we report here that SaPIs ensure their promiscuous transfer by targeting conserved phage mechanisms. This is accomplished because the SaPI Stl repressors have acquired different domains to interact with unrelated proteins, encoded by different phages, but in all cases performing the same conserved function. This elegant strategy allows intra- and inter-generic SaPI transfer, highlighting these elements as one of nature's most fascinating subcellular parasites.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 32%
Researcher 7 17%
Student > Bachelor 6 15%
Student > Master 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 7 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 24%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 15%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Chemical Engineering 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 10 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 May 2018.
All research outputs
#1,301,766
of 15,981,099 outputs
Outputs from eLife
#3,643
of 9,236 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,858
of 274,024 outputs
Outputs of similar age from eLife
#188
of 415 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,981,099 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,236 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 274,024 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 415 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.